Law on the Protection and Management of Absentee Property: Aescribed theft And a crime against legislation

Masoud Akko

The co-presidency of the Autonomous Administration in North-East Syria approved a controversial law called (Law for the Protection and Management of Absentee Property) No. 7 of 2020, consisting of 21 articles, on August 5, 2020. Which gives the Autonomous Administration an excuse to seize movable and immovable property of absentees (one year and Above according to the law) and disposing of it to serve and develop society as indicated in one of the articles of the law.

The Absentee Property Law is fundamentally inconsistent with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the articles of the Social Contract (the Autonomous Administration Constitution). Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: “Everyone has the right to own property alone or in association with others. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.”
Article 17 of the Social Contract for the Democratic Federalism of Northern Syria (transformed into the Autonomous Administration of North-East Syria) states (The Democratic Federalism of Northern Syria adheres to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and all relevant human rights regulations).
Article 43 of the social contract also states that (the right to private property is safeguarded in a manner that does not conflict with the public interest, and is regulated by law).
So how can a law be issued contrary to the General Basic Law of Administration? Especially since the survival of the properties in the current situation does not conflict with the public interest!

The definition of an absentee in the law is a grave mistake. An absentee is a person of unknown residence. As for the expatriate, he has a specific residence and information in a specific place. It also did not explain the law what does temporary or permanent residence mean, and who will be considered temporary or permanent residence, and what is the description of these two residency? How will the Administration act if there are properties entrusted primarily to a legal agent and there are beneficiaries there?
When the legislator enacts a law, there is a basis for it, its goal is a specific benefit. Laws cannot be enacted, or they may not be enacted because there is no specific basis for them. This is to reduce the status of the legislator, and disregard the positive legislation of any society.

The US legislator enacted the Individual Weapon Possession Act at a time when gangs ruled the country, and there was no government authority able to protect individual property and lives. So the law was enacted to protect people themselves and their property.
The Kurdistan Region of Iraq enacted a law prohibiting female genital mutilation (female circumcision) in 2011, because this is a benefit for females, and whoever does that is considered guilty.
Tunisia enacted the Law to Eliminate Violence Against Women in 2017 because this is a general societal benefit, and for women in particular.
Egypt enacted the law criminalizing harassment, and enacted a law, enacted for the first time in the Arab world and the Middle East, which is the law criminalizing bullying, because that is a public benefit for all society.
Laws of protecting marine and wild life, and preventing overhunting in most countries of the world, have a public benefit not only for humans, but for all living creatures and nature as a whole, in order to preserve the diversity and the biological and environmental balance in the universe.

So what is the public or societal benefit from the enactment of the Autonomous Administration of the Law (Protection and Management of Absentee Property?), Noting that all the homes and premises of the absentees are rented or used by citizens.That is, there is no real estate or vacant property that is not invested. Other than that, property is originally usurped by a specific party, mainly by the owner of the property.

Absentees alone have the right to dispose of their property, whether permanent or temporary residence outside their home country. There is no law in any country in the world similar to the one issued by the Autonomous Administration of North-East Syria regarding absentee property.

Some countries legislate to enact expropriation laws for the public benefit from the property or money of absentees who are absent from their homeland for a century, not a year. This no (law) is nothing but theft and a method of appropriating people’s property, a described theft that does not require presumption or proof.

I wonder whether the Autonomous Administration will dispose the property of the people of Afrin as well, especially two years have passed since its residents evicted it? Will it dispose of the property of the people of Serekaniye, Ras al-Ain, and Tel Abiyad in particular, and especially one year is about to pass after those possessions have been Vacated